Saturday's letters: Christian right’

Published: Saturday, January 21, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, January 20, 2012 at 6:08 p.m.

To the editor: It is ironic that while separation of church and state protects churches from the government, there is no mechanism to protect government from the churches. Just look at how the so-called “Christian right” attempts to impose its morality on the general population through legislation.

A current case in point is the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. It is not bad enough that the backers of this proposal attempt to impose their bigoted, prejudiced view of gays and lesbians on the rest of us. They are also eliminating rights of heterosexual couples who are living together in a committed relationship without the benefit of marriage.

Why don’t these people simply do what Jesus commanded them — feed the hungry, clothe the poor and love one another?

Mark Fagerlin

Hendersonville

Compromise

To the editor: Stephen Black recently opined on the need for compromise to eliminate gridlock. A few thoughts:

(a) He seems to decry the “leaders” who all have “core principles.” Later he describes the “sanctimonious swamp” that is Washington.

(b) Yes, you have the “swamp” part correct — but you miss the reason why.

(c) These people are not leaders other than by title; they don’t have core principles — they have clever slogans.

(d) Compromise is not a principle; it is a strategy or tactic. It is an end result of principles.

(e) If they were actual “leaders,” their “core principles” would inform their judgment and direct their actions. They believe in themselves, not in principles. Hence they don’t have any principles, they have tactics, spin, strategy, deflection, blame shifting, etc.

(f) You cannot compromise until you reach consensus; you cannot reach consensus unless you inform and teach; you cannot teach unless you are trusted and have demonstrated moral authority.

(g) There are trivial matters that allow us to get to compromise quickly and easily. However, the severe problems we face demand ­principle-driven actions.

(h) Stephen: Gridlock is a symbol of no core principles, not too many.

Jim Griffin

Hendersonville

Think for yourself

To the editor: Some churches regularly teach that homosexuality is a sin because it says so in the Bible. Other churches don’t interpret the Bible that way. Millions of people have been harmed over the years because the majority’s religious teachings have determined minority groups’ equal rights.

Religious teachings were used to support the horrors of slavery, deny women the right to vote, deny loving interracial couples the right to be married, deny black people their full and equal place in society and deny minority religious groups equal rights.

We have learned from these horrible mistakes that it is wrong to use religious teachings to dehumanize and marginalize any minority group. It is no less wrong today to use religious teachings to deny gay people full and equal rights.

Looking back at our history of inequality, how many people have embraced acceptance and equality and then returned to religion-based bigotry? They simply do not, because they experience the positive effect of being liberated from such a negative force.

Sexual orientation is a natural part of being human, whether it is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or transsexual. Same-sex orientation is not a choice to go against God’s will.

Katherine Nelson

Hendersonville

Tebowing

To the editor: Tebowing has been mocked by comedians and pundits and derided by secularists — those who’ve banned prayer from schools and fought Christmas displays on public property, the words “One nation under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance and even the words “In God We Trust” on our coins.

The Declaration of Independence states that we were “endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights,” such as freedom of speech and freedom of, not from religion. “Separation of church and state” appears nowhere in the Constitution but in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1802 to a group of Danbury Baptists, assuring them that the First Amendment prohibited Congress from establishing a national church.

Jefferson also said in a letter to his friend Dr. Benjamin Rush, dated Sept. 23, 1800, “I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” This statement is rarely quoted. Why? Could it be that the leftist liberal media, along with the Obamas and the Democrats, would rather “change” us into atheists and have us believe in their socialist form of governing?

<p>To the editor: It is ironic that while separation of church and state protects churches from the government, there is no mechanism to protect government from the churches. Just look at how the so-called Christian right attempts to impose its morality on the general population through legislation.</p><p>A current case in point is the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. It is not bad enough that the backers of this proposal attempt to impose their bigoted, prejudiced view of gays and lesbians on the rest of us. They are also eliminating rights of heterosexual couples who are living together in a committed relationship without the benefit of marriage.</p><p>Why don’t these people simply do what Jesus commanded them  feed the hungry, clothe the poor and love one another?</p><p><em>Mark Fagerlin</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Compromise</h3>
<p>To the editor: Stephen Black recently opined on the need for compromise to eliminate gridlock. A few thoughts:</p><p>(a) He seems to decry the leaders who all have core principles. Later he describes the sanctimonious swamp that is Washington.</p><p>(b) Yes, you have the swamp part correct  but you miss the reason why.</p><p>(c) These people are not leaders other than by title; they don’t have core principles  they have clever slogans.</p><p>(d) Compromise is not a principle; it is a strategy or tactic. It is an end result of principles.</p><p>(e) If they were actual leaders, their core principles would inform their judgment and direct their actions. They believe in themselves, not in principles. Hence they don’t have any principles, they have tactics, spin, strategy, deflection, blame shifting, etc.</p><p>(f) You cannot compromise until you reach consensus; you cannot reach consensus unless you inform and teach; you cannot teach unless you are trusted and have demonstrated moral authority.</p><p>(g) There are trivial matters that allow us to get to compromise quickly and easily. However, the severe problems we face demand ­principle-driven actions.</p><p>(h) Stephen: Gridlock is a symbol of no core principles, not too many.</p><p><em>Jim Griffin</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Think for yourself</h3>
<p>To the editor: Some churches regularly teach that homosexuality is a sin because it says so in the Bible. Other churches don’t interpret the Bible that way. Millions of people have been harmed over the years because the majority’s religious teachings have determined minority groups’ equal rights.</p><p>Religious teachings were used to support the horrors of slavery, deny women the right to vote, deny loving interracial couples the right to be married, deny black people their full and equal place in society and deny minority religious groups equal rights.</p><p>We have learned from these horrible mistakes that it is wrong to use religious teachings to dehumanize and marginalize any minority group. It is no less wrong today to use religious teachings to deny gay people full and equal rights.</p><p>Looking back at our history of inequality, how many people have embraced acceptance and equality and then returned to religion-based bigotry? They simply do not, because they experience the positive effect of being liberated from such a negative force.</p><p>Sexual orientation is a natural part of being human, whether it is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or transsexual. Same-sex orientation is not a choice to go against God’s will.</p><p><em>Katherine Nelson</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Tebowing</h3>
<p>To the editor: Tebowing has been mocked by comedians and pundits and derided by secularists  those who’ve banned prayer from schools and fought Christmas displays on public property, the words One nation under God in the Pledge of Allegiance and even the words In God We Trust on our coins.</p><p>The Declaration of Independence states that we were endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of, not from religion. Separation of church and state appears nowhere in the Constitution but in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1802 to a group of Danbury Baptists, assuring them that the First Amendment prohibited Congress from establishing a national church.</p><p>Jefferson also said in a letter to his friend Dr. Benjamin Rush, dated Sept. 23, 1800, I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. This statement is rarely quoted. Why? Could it be that the leftist liberal media, along with the Obamas and the Democrats, would rather change us into atheists and have us believe in their socialist form of governing?</p><p>The fact that Tebow gives thanks to God should not be mocked.</p><p><em>Edmund L. Liguori Sr.</em></p><p><em>Flat Rock</em></p>